From crime to court to capture: A snapshot of Polanski’s decades-old sex case

Looking back at Polanski’s decades-old sex case

LOS ANGELES — Roman Polanski’s legal troubles did not end with his guilty plea in a 1970s child rape case. They only got more complicated. The movie director fled the country before sentencing and remained a fugitive from justice for three decades until his arrest in Switzerland over the weekend.

Here’s a look at the crime and how it has played out in court.

THE EVENT:

Polanski, now 76, was accused of raping a 13-year-old girl in 1977 while photographing her during a modeling session. She said Polanski performed oral sex, intercourse and sodomy on her after giving her champagne and part of a Quaalude pill at Jack Nicholson’s house while the actor was away. Polanski has called the girl a sophisticated teen who willingly had sex with him, but she said he forced himself on her. His victim, Samantha Geimer, who long ago identified herself publicly, sued Polanski and reached an undisclosed settlement. She said she wants the case to be over.

THE CASE:

The Poland-born Polanski was initially indicted on six felony counts, including rape and sodomy, and faced up to life in prison. He pleaded guilty to one count — unlawful sexual intercourse — and spent 42 days in prison for diagnostic tests. Polanski was expected to be sentenced to time served, but he became aware that Judge Laurence J. Rittenband wouldn’t approve the plea agreement and the director fled to France. The U.S. placed a fugitive warrant on Polanski in 1978.

THE AFTERMATH:

Polanski’s attorneys have sought to dismiss the case following the release of the HBO documentary “Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired,” which raised questions about judicial and prosecutorial misconduct. The film contends Rittenband, who has since died, was improperly consulted by a prosecutor not assigned to Polanski’s case about what kind of sentence the film director should receive. While Superior Court Judge Peter Espinoza earlier this year found there was “substantial misconduct” in the handling of the original case, he dismissed Polanski’s motion to throw out the case because the director did not appear in court. Polanski risked arrest on a fugitive warrant if he returned to Los Angeles. He has appealed Espinoza’s decision, and a California appellate court is reviewing the case.